In re Estate of John Schumann
67 N.E.3d 365
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2016Background
- John O. Schumann ("Pete") died in July 2013. Mary Ann Herren (aka Yoswig), his caretaker and former attorney-in-fact, petitioned to probate a will dated October 18, 2007 naming her executrix and devising the estate to a trust dated the same day.
- Hanna and Nathan Struever (children of Pete's late wife Alice) filed an amended petition contesting the 2007 will, alleging lack of testamentary capacity and undue influence by Herren, and claimed Pete had executed a 2002 will/trust that benefited them.
- The 2007 will expressly revoked all prior wills; the 2002 will for Pete was not attached to the record, though Alice’s 2002 will and Pete’s 2002 trust were attached to the Struevers’ pleading.
- Herren moved to dismiss, later asserting lack of standing under In re Estate of Schlenker (2004) because the 2007 will’s revocation clause voided prior wills and thus the Struevers could not claim standing as beneficiaries of the 2002 will.
- The trial court initially denied dismissal but later granted reconsideration, holding under Schlenker the 2002 will must be regarded as void and that the Struevers lacked standing as interested persons; the Struevers appealed.
- The appellate court reversed, holding Schlenker did not bar the Struevers’ standing and that Herren failed to meet her burden to plead and prove lack of standing on a section 2-619 motion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Struever) | Defendant's Argument (Herren) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Struevers had standing to contest the 2007 will | They are legatees under Pete’s 2002 will and thus have a direct pecuniary interest to challenge the 2007 will | Schlenker requires treating prior wills as void when a later will revokes prior wills, so the 2002 will cannot confer standing; Struevers also failed to attach the 2002 will | Reversed: Struevers have standing as alleged legatees; Schlenker does not categorically bar reliance on a prior will at the 2-619 stage, and Herren failed to meet burden to prove lack of standing |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Estate of Schlenker, 209 Ill. 2d 456, 808 N.E.2d 995 (Ill. 2004) (holds an heir has standing to contest a will; discusses treating prior wills as void at pleading stage where revocation clause exists and no proof of prior wills’ validity is offered)
- Crooker v. McArdle, 332 Ill. 27, 163 N.E. 384 (Ill. 1928) (a will is not legally effective, including for revoking a prior will, until admitted to probate)
- In re Estate of Keener, 167 Ill. App. 3d 270, 521 N.E.2d 232 (Ill. App. 1988) (legatee under an earlier will may lack standing if they have no direct pecuniary interest in the immediately preceding will)
- In re Estate of Malcolm, 234 Ill. App. 3d 962, 602 N.E.2d 41 (Ill. App. 1992) (recognizes that legatees under a prior will are generally "interested persons" with standing to contest a subsequent will)